REVIEW OF COMMUNICATION RESEARCH
specializes in publishing literature review articles

Submit a Manuscript

If you have NOT written the manuscript, fill in a proposal form and send it to the editor (This email address is being protected from spambots. You need JavaScript enabled to view it.).

If you have written the mauscript, upload it to the submission site.

 

In case you have any problem or doubt, write to This email address is being protected from spambots. You need JavaScript enabled to view it. or This email address is being protected from spambots. You need JavaScript enabled to view it.

 

Read more...

Are you exploring a new research question, but you cannot find an authorative literature review? Is there a seasoned scholar that you believe should use his or her experience to synthesize the field? Is there an upcoming colleague who could break down the state of literature in your field from a fresh and unconventional angle? Let us know! Fill in the following questionnaire and submit it.

 

Read more...

Choose between Literature Insights and SoL format

 

Our New and Second Article Format: State of the Literature

Review of Communication Research is going to publish a second format which is similar but not equal to the standard literature reviews we are publishing (which we call literature insights.) It will be presented in a different section of the journal. We keep publishing our standard literature reviews, therefore you can choose which format you want to write.

Click here and watch the video we have prepared to explain to you the differences between the two formats.

 

Which format should you choose to write?

 

In our standard literature reviews (i.e., literature insights), authors (a) revise all the relevant literature written on a topic, (b) structure it by a relevant categorization criterion, (c) evaluate the literature critically, (d) offer a strong input to the literature, and (e) suggest future research. This input could be clarifying a problem, identifying relations unnoticed before, finding contradictions between theories, pointing out inconsistencies in findings presented in the literature, or summarizing published literature into a new definition or a new theory. It is not easy to push forward the literature in this way. That is the reason why Review of Communication Research requires authors of literature insights to be experienced. We would not follow this editorial policy if we published empirical research articles.


The state-of-the-literature articles (SoL) follow the same steps literature insights do, but they do not need to give any relevant theoretical push to published literature (step d). Therefore, SoL articles are less demanding than our literature-insights articles. Both experienced and less experienced authors can write and publish an SoL article.
In SoL articles, authors have to (a) revise all the relevant literature written on a topic, (b) structure it by a relevant categorization criterion, (c) evaluate the literature critically, therefore understand and explain the relations between the different variables, and (d) suggest future research.

 

Click here to watch a two-minutes video that will explain to you the process to publish an SoL article. You can also read here about the process to publish a literature-insights or an SoL article.

 

Why do we want to publish SoL articles?


The reason is straightforward: SoL articles are useful for the advancement of the Communication field. SoL articles explain what is known about a topic at a specific moment in time, and do it critically. Therefore, SoL articles help the scholars who start a research on a specific topic. For example, a scholar who starts a research on media effects and Facebook should search and read an SoL article to apprehend what is known about that topic at a specific moment in time. The article would work like a map and would give scholars a general vision to decide from which point to start. Book chapters have this function often. However, book chapters are unavailable in many libraries.

 

Read more...

Ethical Standards for Authors

Ethical Standards for Authors

 

Review of Communication Research expects that all authors submitting a manuscript adhere to the ethical guidelines set by the International Communication Association (ICA) in the Publication Policies and Procedures. In this sense, all manuscripts submitted to RCR must be original works that:

(a) credit all authors,

(b) acknowledge sources and supporting material, and

(c) identify previous publication of the manuscript in an earlier form. The place, time, and form of the previous publication, and whether the present material duplicates or is substantially different than the earlier presentation, must be made explicit in a cover letter accompanying the manuscript submission. RCR does not publish articles that have been previously published in substantially the same form.

According to ICA policies and procedures, any manuscript submitted to RCR must not be simultaneously considered by another publication. If extraordinary circumstances call for simultaneous submission, RCR editor should be informed by the author(s). Decisions regarding the originality of and/or appropriateness of a submitted manuscript will be rendered by the editor. Submitting a manuscript to two journals at once duplicates the efforts of editors and peer reviewers to review the manuscript and any subsequent revisions that they request. If the manuscript is accepted in one journal the author will have to withdraw the paper from the second journal, wasting the time of the editors and peer reviewers who reviewed the manuscript.

The editorial office will provide no information regarding the status of a submission to anyone other than the author (or a person the author designates in writing) of a manuscript, book review, or other material submitted to RCR for publication.

Moreover, authors submitting a manuscript to RCR for publication adhere to the following ethical guidelines mostly copied from or inspired by APA Manual 6th Ed., Taylor and Francis Publisher ethical code, Elsevier’s Publishing Ethics Resource Kit (PERK), and from Code of conduct and best practice guidelines for journal editors by COPE :

- Ethical Reporting of Research Results. Scholars do not fabricate or falsify data because science is build on previous research. Sometimes scientists make mistakes that are not identified during the reviewing process. It takes time and effort to correct a wrong result. It is not acceptable that a scholar misleads others on purpose, for personal benefit. In this sense, “omitting troublesome observations from reports to present a more convincing story is also prohibited” and “authors are responsible for making such errors public if the errors are discovered after publication” (APA, 6th: 12).

- All authors must declare that the article they submit to RCR is their own original work, which does not infringe the intellectual property rights of any other person or entity, and cannot be considered as plagiarizing any other published work. If an author is submitting a manuscript which includes his or her own previously published work, new content has to be more than 50% of the manuscript.

- If the manuscript incorporates any previously copyrighted material (e.g. graphs, images) which is not in the public domain, author/s shall obtain written permission from the copyright owner of such material to be published in RCR, and shall deliver such written permission to RCR prior to the submission of the Article Proposal if the copyrighted material is their own writing, or prior to the publication if the copyrighted material is a graph, image, table or text with more than 400 words.

- All authors named on the paper are equally held accountable for the content of a submitted manuscript or published paper.

- The corresponding author must ensure all named co-authors consent to publication and to being named as a co-author. All persons who have made significant scientific or literary contributions and who shares responsibility and accountability for the results to the work reported should be named as co-authors.

- Authors must appropriately cite all relevant publications. Information obtained privately, as in conversation, correspondence, or discussion with third parties, should not be used or reported in the author's work unless fully cited, and with the permission of that third party.

- Authors must avoid making defamatory statements in submitted articles which could be construed as impugning any person's reputation.

- Authors must declare any potential conflict of interest – be it professional or financial – which could be held to arise with respect to the article.

- Authors must disclose all sources of funding for the research reported in the paper.

 

Editor

This email address is being protected from spambots. You need JavaScript enabled to view it.

Approved, April 2014

Read more...

Why submit?

 

 Why submit? Here there are some reasons

 

Review of Commmunication Research (RCR) specializes in publishing LITERATURE REVIEWS in the field of communication. We accept manuscripts and proposals in any area.

  

 

High Quality

- RCR has an excellent Editorial Board, Associate Editors, and Editor, and invites the best scholars as ad-hoc reviewers.

- You can be part of a set of excellent authors who have published with us (W. James Potter--three times--, Timothy Levine, James D. Ivory, Maxwell McCombs, Talia Stroud, James P. Dillard, Lijiang Shen, Kory Floyd, Scott W. Campbell, Robert Abelman, John Sherry, Daniel McDonald, Rajiv Rimal, Douglas McLeod--twice--, Anneke De Graaf, José Sanders, Hans Hoeken, Jake Harwood, and a long etcetera.)

- The double-blind peer-review process plus the open-peer review assure the best standards of editorial quality.

***

 

Rapid Publication After Acceptance

Once an article has been accepted, it receives a DOI number and it is published online in the next few days. Articles are publised at any time of the year to make them available to readers.

 

The production process is very fast too.

***

 

 Active Article Promotion

Articles are actively promoted throughout the world by our editorial staff and social media.

High Impact

- The articles we publish are downloadable by anybody in the world. The articles we have published have been downloaded by scholars from the USA, China, Europe, but also from most countries around the globe. Name it, from A to Z. Albania? Yes; Algeria? Yes; Bahrain? Yes; Bangladesh? Yes; (...); Uganda? Yes; Uzbekistan? Yes; Venezuela? Yes; Zambia? Yes; Zimbabwe? Yes.

- Scholars will reach your article. For example, McCombs and Stroud's article has been downloaded almost 15,500 times from the official website only.

- Our articles are listed in Web of Science, Scopus, and other databases. 

- The fact that articles are available online and citable as soon as it is accepted is an additional factor that helps to rise our articles impact factor.

- Here we offer you some statistics that can give you an idea of our citation performance:

1. RCR ranks #3 of 415 in Communication for the SNIP indicator by SCOPUS. SNIP "helps you make a direct comparison of sources in different subject fields." (https://service.elsevier.com/app/answers/detail/a_id/14884/kw/snip/supporthub/scopus/related/1/)

If you want to make the search, these are the steps: a) go to https://www.scopus.com/sources, b) change the search to "subject area", c) enter "communication" and mark the box, d) scroll the heading to find the SNIP column, and e) sort the list by SNIP, from highest to lowest. You will see the list, but you will have to scroll again the heading to see the SNIP column. Contact us if you are not able to find the numbers we claim. We can prove our statements.

snip 2018

 

2. RCR ranks #81 of 7,768 in Social Sciences for the SNIP indicator by SCOPUS among all journals :

sNIP 2018 ciencias sociales

 

 

3. RCR has a Scopus CiteScore Tracker 2019 of 4.0 on April 2020.

 

4. RCR articles have an average citation per item of 10.1 in Web of Science in February 2020 (RCR is included in Web of Science Core Collection.)

 

5. The Impact Factor that an external organization has calculated using Journal of Citations Reports (JCR) statistic for 2018 is 5.7 (please, note that RCR is indexted in Web of Science but it is not ranked in JCR.)

Ask us for more information or visit the source: https://www.revistacomunicar.com/index.php?contenido=ranking-revistas-esci#Communication.

 

IP2018

 

You can check the statement of our impact factor by confirming the data with Scopus Google Scholar, or Web of Science.

 ***

Long-Term Availability

We assure the long-term permanence in open-access repositories (e.g., Internet Archive; Academia; Social Science Open Access Repository, SSOAR).

The articles have an assigned DOI number for permanent location.

Authors and scholars are free to save the article in any repository they wish and to distribute the articles as they wish, as long as it is not for commercial use.

***

  

Diamond Open Access and Copyright Retention

RCR is committed with free accessibility of scientific production to any scholar or student in any country in the world.

Diamond Open Access means that anybody from any country in the world can download and read the articles. In this way, we are supporting a fair distribution of academic knowledge. Diamond Open Access means that authors can distribute the articles as they wish, as long as there is no commercial benefit. Finally, Diamond Open Access means that authors do not have to pay Articles Prochessing Charges.

The authors keep the copyright.

 ***

Some sentences that authors and reviewers have written to our editors. Nevertheless, the work of the editors would not be possible without the extremely talented work of the members of our editorial board, ad-hoc reviewers, and editorial staff. Thank you!

 

 

  • "You are by far the best editor I have ever had the privilege to work with! Thank you so much."
  •  

  • "Wow, I am humbled by your keen eye for errors and your clear explanations of grammar and mechanics. I agree with all of your comments."
  •  

  • “Thank you so much! You are one of the most dedicated editors I've ever worked with. It's my honor to contribute to RCR, and I am looking forward to seeing the piece out.”
  •  

  • “Wow, I honestly salute the way in which you engage with the authors! It’s a very respectful and motivating tone! The feedback is massive, but at the same time, it’s very helpful and you all really invested time in helping them to improve the manuscript.”
  •  

  • “I can not thank you enough for your insightful guidance, the manuscript would not be where it is at now without your invaluable advice,” and “Many thanks again to your invaluable guidance, for which I am immensely grateful.”
  •  

  • “I continue to be enormously impressed with you as an editor. You do it all well, even down to the smallest of line edits. Thank you so much for all the quality you added to our work.”
  •  

  • “I'm impressed with how quickly your journal moves from acceptance to publication.”
  •  

  • “In sum, this experience has led me to a basic conclusion: You are doing a great job here. You are taking the time to provide valuable and direct feedback to authors, and you are interpreting (and improving) rather than merely passing along reviewer comments. (…) Thank you for all of your work on the journal and for the discipline.”
  •  

  • “This is by far the nicest rejection, probably ever in the history of rejections (…) I am impressed by this journal and its efforts related to encouraging scholars to conceptually map and evaluate the state of literature. Thank you for your leadership. This sort of journal is necessary as the number of journals has proliferated. I will consider this journal following the completion of several other manuscripts I am planning (…) Thank you for your timely response so that I can move forward elsewhere with this piece.”
  •  

  • “Thank you so much for the excellent editorship of this manuscript and the journal. This was far and away the most positive experience I have had in the process of publication, and you deserve much commendation for your excellent work.”
  •  

    Free of Charges

    We do not charge any fee to authors. But we will charge soon. Submit your manuscript now.

     

    If you have written the manuscript, upload it to our Editorial Management System .

    If you have not written the manuscript, fill in the proposal form , and send it to the editor (This email address is being protected from spambots. You need JavaScript enabled to view it.)

      

    WE WOULD LOVE TO HELP YOU TO PUBLISH

    YOUR LITERATURE REVIEW OR META-ANALYSIS!

    Contact us: This email address is being protected from spambots. You need JavaScript enabled to view it. or This email address is being protected from spambots. You need JavaScript enabled to view it.

     

    Read more...

    JoomShaper